>> reporter: no doubt, this teen is one step closer to making her dream come true. >> i love her. duval ranked 296th in the world. that's it for me. have a wonderful afternoon. brooke baldwin takes it from brooke baldwin takes it from here. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com syria vows to defend itself should the u.s. attack. and as tensions rise, some experts say taking action could be a huge mistake. you'll hear why. i'm brooke baldwin. the news is now. fears grow that syrian hackers may target u.s. companies online in a cyber war. plus, fast food workers across america demanding 15 bucks an hour. will they get it? and if you're texting someone who's behind the wheel, watch out. you could be in trouble with the law. and the best part of coming

home. hi there. i'm brooke baldwin. great to be with you on this thursday. today, the world waits with the u.s., ready to strike syria. i know, a lot of questions here. like how, when that strike could happen as this drum beat for military action continues. i should tell you that the dissenting voices are growing louder. the question now, if the u.s. should strike at all. right now u.n. chemical weapons inspectors are still inside syria. you see this video? it shows them wearing gas masks. they're there collecting blood samples from victims of the most recent chemical weapons attack on the outskirts of the capital city of damascus. and they're also talking to, they're interviewing the survivors of that attack. they have been there for a week. but they're not finished yet. the group expected to leave the country this saturday and report

its findings sometime after that. and for britain, that's reason enough for the uk and the world to wait. >> the weapons inspectors are in the midst of their work and will be reporting in the coming days. that is why today could not have been the day when the house was asked to decide on military action. for this -- for this house, for this house, for this house it is surely a basic point. evidence should precede decision, not decision precede evidence. >> it is this house that will decide what steps we next take. if you agree to the motion i've set down, no action can be taken until we have heard from the u.n. weapons inspectors, until there's been further action at the united nations, and another vote in this house. >> so that was today in the uk. back here in the u.s., white house officials are today briefing members of congress. they'll be doing that in a couple of hours. but unlike what we saw in the uk, their intentions, whatever

they may be, are not up for debate. cnn's dana bash, our chief congressional correspondent, joins me now. when you look at history, dana, it shows that presidents -- just a reminder. u i any you know this. presidents can launch military action without approval from congress. grenada, '83. pan na, '89. iraq, '91. haiti, '94. kosovo, '99. why a briefing in a couple of hours, dana bash? >> reporter: in short, politics. members of congress, even natural allies of president obama have been demanding coordination. tonight 6:00 p.m. this evening secretaries of state and defense and others will hold a conference call with president obama and other key committee heads to discuss the nation's posture on syria. what's interesting is that lawmakers are not here. they are still back in their states, in their districts on congressional recess. since they're all over the country, some will be on their cell phones. it is not going to be a secure line. meaning it can't be classified.

it's going to be an unclassified conversation. one source who's going to be on the call who i talked to kind of rolled his eyes and said this means there's only so much they can really tell us about their plans. as you said, look, there's a big debate about whether the president needs congress's authorization legally. but politically, there's certainly a feeling among lawmakers in both parties that he's taking congress for granted. and it just would be in his best interest to get more members of congress on board. because they are inclined to do so, many of them. >> so there's the politics side of this. there's also public support. when you look at the polls, right, there are many, when you look at our poll back in may, americans were asked if assad used chemical weapons, does that justify military intervention. you see back in may, that number, the yes is huge. 66%. when you look at recent polls, you know, they indicate that americans are opposed to intervention in syria. saying it's just not in our best national interest. so that said, in talking to these members of congress, dana, how important is how americans feel? is there even a debate there?

>> reporter: it's absolutely important. at the end of the tay members of congress are elected by their constituents and these voters who respond to these polls. the fact that over 100 lawmakers signed a letter saying there must be debate is fascinating. but, you know, the reason i think -- one of the reasons we're not looking for a britain style emergency callback of parliament or congress in this case to air things out, first of all, it's just because it's not the culture in the u.s. which the president is probably grateful for. but also because if congress did come back and have a vote, at this point, because in part of the polls you just cited, it would be probably hard to have a yes vote on authorization. people are really war weary out there. people i talk to say that that would end up -- if they had authorization vote and it failed, of course embarrassing the president, jeopardizing the u.s.'s ability to rally allies and ultimately hurt the u.s.'s credibility. >> you mentioned the letter. we'll be talking to congresswoman barbara lee out of california. democrat. she's one of those who says yes to debates.

we'll hear from her at the top of next hour. dana bash, thank you very much for us in washington. in damascus today, here he is. syrian leader bashar al assad appearing on state-run television. and he is smiling, he's gesturing. he said his country will defend itself against any and all aggression. and in a pbs interview, president obama characterized any action he'd take as a targeted, limited shot across the bow. just a short time ago, his spokesman, josh ernest, laid out the rationale for action. >> there is an international norm against the use of chemical weapons. it is important for assad regime and other totalitarian dictators around the globe to understand that the international community will not tolerate the indiscriminate widespread use of chemical weapons. particularly against women and children as they're sleeping in their beds. >> so let's delve into this a

little bit more, shall we? joining me from washington, general james "spider" marks. from new york, ed hussein, senior fellow for middle eastern studies at the council on foreign relations. welcome to both of you. general marks, i just want to begin with you. we have witnessed more than 100,000 deaths in syria, and thus far we are in, what, year three? pretty much stood on the sidelines. from your per spekctive at a military man why would the use of chemical weapons suddenly tip the balance in the favor of intervention. >> what has been indicated, clearly the use of chemical weapons violates international law. that by itself should at least galvanize the administration and it has, as well as the international community to do something. the problem that we have in syria is is that it's not isolated just to the use of chemical weapons. it's been in the midst of a three-year rebellion, as you've indicated. yet up until this point, we've

been satisfied with our position to simply diplomatically and vocally at a time our disapproval. we're at a point now where the president has indicated that he needs to act. sadly, what has been described as a potential course of action won't necessarily be the cure that gets at the disease. the disease certainly is the assad regime. and some legitimate transition of power. that's not going to take place based on what we know so far. >> i want to get to that. on the flip side, ed hussein, i read your piece. the cnn opinion piece. your lead line basically is syria's civil war is not america's problem. so in contrast to president obama, we just saw british prime minister david cameron, you say this isn't the problem of the united states. why is that? >> forgive me. the -- the voiceover isn't clear enough. you're asking why it's not the problem of the united states, right? >> yes, correct. >> yeah. because this is not what we might be classifying as a war on

necessity for the united states. richard haass makes a compelling case between the two types of war. war of choice versus war of necessity. the united states as for most countries ought to go to war when it's a war of necessity. the case in syria is not a situation in which it demands u.s. blood and treasure to be sacrificed at this juncture. if, indeed, assad did use chemical weapons, again, it's worth us being skeptical. the evidence is yet to emerge that it's 100% certain that it was, indeed, the regime. if it was, indeed, the regime that used them, then we have israel in the region that can take action. we have turkey. we have egypt. at a stretch we have the european union and others around the world who can act without the united states getting involved yet again in another muslim majority country, yet again another arab country, stoking anti-american sentiment in the region and risking greater blowback both here in the homeland and in the middle east. america is overly stretched i

think in the middle east. at this juncture it's wiser to hold back and let others act. >> your point as we saw on the map, those other countries with military might should, perhaps, give us pause if they are not acting. but spider marks, what is the risk, then, in not acting or just doing too little here? >> well, it appears like we're going to do too little. yet get ourselves potentially entangled in a fight in syria. and i completely agree. you don't want to have -- this is not necessarily a war of choice. it should not be a war of choice. in fact, the president has described the possibility of an engagement that's very, very tactical in nature. it won't achieve any end state that leads to a conclusion that the international community would agree is one that we would prefer. so by standing back, we certainly run the risk of sending a very powerful message in the region to iran that you do what you want with weapons of mass destruction and we'll allow you to do that. >> ed husane, final word.

>> i think by getting involved we exacerbate the risks. we've already seen the iranian take action against israel. we may see the syrians responding and attacking israel and turkey. by attacking chemical weapon stockpiles which we can't do, because we don't know where they are, we run the risk of toxins spreading again more widely into the f the population. we're damned if we do, damned if we don't. i suspect the drum beats of war are being played too loud and too quickly for us to take a step back. there's a lesson to be drawn, i think, from the european and british skepticism of what's going on in syria at the moment. >> ed husain, and general marks, my thanks to both of you. as we talk chemical weapons, there's this whole other factor. one of the concerns, if the

united states does launch this limited military strike against syria, is that it might be answered by a wave of attacks on american companies' computers. brian todd has been looking boo the possibility of a cyber war. what kind of companies would be at risk here? >> brooke, so far it's been mostly media companies in the u.s. that have been at risk. as we know now, this group the syrian electronic army, a group of young hackers that supports the assad regime essentially took down "the new york times" website and twitter's website a couple of days ago, shutting "the new york times" website down for more than 20 hours. by the way, this morning a lot of users still couldn't get on the times website. mostly, brooke, they have targeted media websites. they've done a pretty effective job of doing that over the past couple years. this past spring, this group hacked into the associated press website and put out a fake message about explosions at the white house that president obama was injured. that caused a bit of a panic. it caused stocks to tumble. they're very effective at doing that. so far they have only hit at websites. and a u.s. official just told me, he described this group as a

murky underground outfit that specializes in plastering pro-regime propaganda across some of the most popular websites. that's the way they've operated this thus far, brooke. >> brian todd, thank you. we'll look for your reporting on this situation. coming up, if you send a text to someone who is driving, you could be in legal trouble. you realize that? my panel debates that. plus, huge breaking news out of the nfl late this afternoon here. we are getting that a settlement has been reached between the league and thousands of players over concussions. wait until you hear what each player gets. that's next. [ male announcer ] this is jim, a man who doesn't stand still. but jim has afib, atrial fibrillation -- an irregular heartbeat, not caused by a heart valve problem. that puts jim at a greater risk of stroke. for years, jim's medicine tied him to a monthly trip to the clinic to get his blood tested. but now, with once-a-day xarelto®, jim's on the move. jim's doctor recommended xarelto®.

like warfarin, xarelto® is proven effective to reduce afib-related stroke risk. but xarelto® is the first and only once-a-day prescription blood thinner for patients with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. that doesn't require routine blood monitoring. so jim's not tied to that monitoring routine. [ gps ] proceed to the designated route. not today. [ male announcer ] for patients currently well managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® and warfarin compare in reducing the risk of stroke. xarelto® is just one pill a day taken with the evening meal. plus, with no known dietary restrictions, jim can eat the healthy foods he likes. do not stop taking xarelto®, rivaroxaban, without talking to the doctor who prescribes it as this may increase the risk of having a stroke. get help right away if you develop any symptoms like bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. you may have a higher risk of bleeding if you take xarelto® with aspirin products, nsaids or blood thinners. talk to your doctor before taking xarelto® if you have abnormal bleeding. xarelto® can cause bleeding, which can be serious,

and rarely may lead to death. you are likely to bruise more easily on xarelto® and it may take longer for bleeding to stop. tell your doctors you are taking xarelto® before any planned medical or dental procedures. before starting xarelto®, tell your doctor about any conditions such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems. xarelto® is not for patients with artificial heart valves. jim changed his routine. ask your doctor about xarelto®. once a day xarelto® means no regular blood monitoring -- no known dietary restrictions. for more information and savings options, call 1-888-xarelto or visit goxarelto.com. folks have suffered from frequent heartburn. but getting heartburn and then treating day after day is a thing of the past.

block the acid with prilosec otc, and don't get heartburn in the first place. [ male announcer ] one pill each morning. 24 hours. zero heartburn. today fast food workers are taking over not just their bosses' sidewalks, but their slogans. hold the burgers, hold the fries, make our wages supersize. these workers in detroit, they want 15 tlrs an hour. what they call a livable wage. workers are striking in boston , atlanta, houston, new york. you see them. dozens of other cities today. to ask places like mcdonald's, kentucky fried chicken, other

names you know to increase worker pay. the median wage for a fast food employee is now just over $9 an hour. you do the math. that's just about $18,500 a year. more than $4,000 below what the government says is the poverty line for a family of four. that's $23,000 a year. >> it's clear that the inequality of income in this country is too far gone. or too long. that's why $15 an hour seems so high. it's gone unchecked. you know, a lot of corporations are allowed to self-regulate these days. this is what happens. >> the number of workers making minimum wage in the restaurant industry is 5%. again, the point is that we're creating opportunity. we're creating opportunity for everybody. and i think you cannot just pay wages based on a person's need. you've got to pay wages based on the -- what the economy is willing to bear and the business

model. >> organizers also say workers outside the food business joined the fight, including those in sears, macy's and cvs. last year mcdonald's, macy's and yum brands each posted $1 billion in profit. one economist says if forced to pay 15 bucks an hour, these fast food giants would hire fewer people and find more automated ways to serve food. some breaking news here into us at cnn. a historic move by the nfl. not on the field. in the court. the national football league has reached a $765 million settlement with 4,500 former players. the players had sued the league, accusing the nfl of concealing the dangers of head traumas and concussions as they took hit after hit during their games. a judge still has to sign off on the deal, but here's how the money is supposed to be allocated. you have 75 million bucks for medical exams.

$675 million in compensation for concussion injuries. $10 million, medical research. plus, legal fees and other expenses. all related to this huge lawsuit. joining me on the phone, former atlanta falcon joel anderson, who was also part of this lawsuit. jamal, when we figure this out here, it comes out to about $170,000 a player. you were part of this. does that sound fair to you? >> you know, brooke, the thing that was most important to me and -- to bring attention to the plight of thousands of former players. the importance of taking concussion and head trauma seriously. i was never -- there was never a big deal to me what the end rainbow was going to look like for each player or anything like that. but just -- i love this game. we love the game of football. there are thousands of players who love the game and continue to watch the game but felt like the things that are in place now

could have been possibly put in place a number of years ago to assure better safety. understanding that football is what it is and it's a dangerous sport. it's a physical sport. but to have things in place that can make the game as safe as we possibly can. as safe as our knowledge has allowed us to be. that was the thing that was of importance. it's very nice to see the nfl do something to move forward and to try to take care of the guys who played this game and who put the game in the position that it is to be as profitable as it is. >> yeah. and i hear you. you say this isn't about the money. this is about raising awareness. you and i have talked. i know you love this game. but when you think about this settlement, that means the nfl, they don't have to admit to any liability. my next question, concern, has to do with the present players. what does this -- what message does this settlement send to guys currently on the field? >> well, i think -- i think, number one, it's going to send a message that, you know, there's a big conversation about the

care, concern and the health of players who play this game for a number of years and things they've been going through. i think if you're a current player you can look at this and see that -- that this matters to the nfl. that there is somebody somewhere who thinks that it's important to take care of guys who are dealing with things that happen to them while they played the game of football. they're going through certain difficulties in their life physically or certain ailments that were brought about by concussions and the symptoms we've been seeing with thousands of players, i think if you look at -- you're a current player, you go, it matters. this is something that matters. yes, they're not accepting any responsibility for some of the things that were involved in the lawsuit. but at least they put the proper foot forward to say, hey, these players, the guys who played the game before the current players actually matter. taking care of our players and doing the best that we can to see to it that our former

players are in the best health possible. we can see to it. i think guys that are playing right now have to be pleased with that and have to know that at least from right now, the nfl looks like they're putting the right foot forward and everybody's pleased about it. >> jamaal anderson, thanks for calling in. we appreciate it. got more breaking news for you. this one pertaining to marijuana. the obama administration has just revealed whether it will try and block states from legalizing it. this is a huge, huge deal on this decision. that's next. so then the little tiny chipmunks go all the way up... ♪ [ female announcer ] when your swapportunity comes, take it. ♪ what? what? what? [ female announcer ] yoplait. it is so good.

now to that key ruling in the trial of accused colorado theater shooter james holmes. a judge citing colorado's constitution has ruled that every single victim of that shooting has the right to be present at every critical stage of the proceeding. holmes' lawyer had called for witnesses to be excluded, saying they wanted to be certain that the testimony would not be clouded, influenced by the testimony of others. holmes faces 166 charges for allegedly killing those 12 people and wounding 70 others at

a batman movie screening. he has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity. this just into us here from the department of justice. for now, the feds are not going to overturn these new recreational marijuana laws in colorado, washington state and, in fact, the department of justice won't try to block new state laws that legalize marijuana. remember this? just about ten months ago, voters in colorado and washington state approved legalization of recreational marijuana. and since then, you've had lawmakers from both states, they've been asking the justice department for guidance. how would this work? federal law, as you know, bans all possession of marijuana. so what happens when state marijuana laws clash with federal laws? justice reporter evan perez is on this from washington. big news, evan, from the federal government. >> reporter: right. this has been anticipated for several months. hotly debated inside the justice

department. essentially what the federal government is saying in these states where they've passed these laws to allow recreational use and states where they allow medicinal marijuana, the feds are not essentially going to get involved with recreational use or medicinal use. essentially they're going to focus on eight priorities. keeping pot out of the hands of minors. making sure that -- that it's not being trafficked across state lines. and that drug cartels aren't -- aren't involved in the marijuana trade. if you steer clear of these areas, the feds are saying, we're not going to come after you. >> hmm. what about the agents who would normally -- would normally come after you, even though now it's legal in these states? does this essentially make their job easier, or no? >> well, that's actually one of the things that's been hotly debated inside the justice the president. the dea in particular, you have agents who say this sends mixed messages. that it makes their job a lot harder. and this is one reason why the feds essentially did not go the

additional step. there have been a lot of pressure to change marijuana from being a banned substance under the controlled substances act. and this did not happen. essentially what they're doing is they're walking a line, keeping it illegal, but saying they're going to abide by these state laws. >> in colorado and washington state. how about that. evan perez, thank you very much with that from washington. coming up, you know not to text while driving. but one state trying to make sending a text to someone who is driving a crime. how is that going to work? that's coming up a little later. first, as conditions definitely heat up as we watch syria, president obama is weighing his options. critics say the u.s. should stay out. but the military is poised to act. let's talk about this looming turf battle, perhaps, between the president and congress. a couple hours away from that conference call. that's next. anncr: expedia is giving away a trip every day.

where would you go? woman: 'greece.' woman 2: 'i want to go to bora bora.' man: 'i'd always like to go to china.' anncr: download the expedia app and your next trip could be on us. expedia, find yours. what are you guys doing? having some fiber! with new phillips' fiber good gummies. they're fruity delicious! just two gummies have 4 grams of fiber! to help support regularity! i want some... [ woman ] hop on over! [ marge ] fiber the fun way, from phillips'. a body at rest tends to stay at rest... while a body in motion tends to stay in motion. staying active can actually ease arthritis symptoms. but if you have arthritis, staying active can be difficult. prescription celebrex can help relieve arthritis pain so your body can stay in motion. because just one 200mg celebrex a day can provide 24 hour relief for many with arthritis pain and inflammation. plus, in clinical studies, celebrex is proven to improve daily physical function so moving is easier.

celebrex can be taken with or without food. and it's not a narcotic. you and your doctor should balance the benefits with the risks. all prescription nsaids, like celebrex, ibuprofen, naproxen and meloxicam have the same cardiovascular warning. they all may increase the chance of heart attack or stroke, which can lead to death. this chance increases if you have heart disease or risk factors such as high blood pressure or when nsaids are taken for long periods. nsaids, like celebrex, increase the chance of serious skin or allergic reactions, or stomach and intestine problems, such as bleeding and ulcers, which can occur without warning and may cause death. patients also taking aspirin and the elderly are at increased risk for stomach bleeding and ulcers. don't take celebrex if you have bleeding in the stomach or intestine, or had an asthma attack, hives, other allergies to aspirin, nsaids or sulfonamides. get help right away if you have swelling of the face or throat, or trouble breathing. tell your doctor your medical history. and find an arthritis treatment for you. visit celebrex.com and ask your doctor about celebrex. for a body in motion.

i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, it could save you thousands in out-of-pocket costs. call now to request your free decision guide. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and you never need a referral. see why millions of people have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp. don't wait. call now.

it is a busy one. the news continues to come in here. another breaking story for you. the u.s. treasury department and the irs now saying that all legal same-sex marriages will be recognized for federal tax purposes. so this ruling applies, whether a couple lives in a state where same-sex marriage is legal or if they don't. so huge, huge news there coming from the treasury department and the irs when it comes to same-sex marriages recognized for federal tax purposes. as soon as we get more information, we'll pass it along to you here on cnn. meantime, happening right now, a closed door meeting of the u.n. security council on the response to a chemical attack on syria. cnn has learned this meeting is at the request of russia. diplomats britain, china, france, russia and the united states are there right now. meantime, the u.s. intelligence on syria is in. and it shows the movement of

chemical weapons in the leadup to a deadly sarin gas attack in the outskirts of damascus. a senior u.s. official telling cnn it was, quote, not a rogue element of assad's regime behind this attack. and there's no evidence to show it was an attack from the rebel side. right now u.n. chemical weapons inspectors, they are still there in country. still inside syria. there they are wearing the gas masks, collecting blood samples. they are expected to leave on saturday and report its findings sometime after that. all of this happening as a debate in the uk parliament today on whether to act militari militarily. and it got pretty fiery. take a look for yourself. >> the uk government expected that we should vote for a blank check that would have allowed uk military action before u.n. weapons inspectors concluded their investigations and before their detailed evidence was provided to the united nations or, indeed, members of this house. having been misled on reasons

for war in iraq, the least the uk government could have done is provide detail evidence and, frankly, they have not. >> here in the u.s., there will be no debate. white house officials today merely briefing members of congress about the possible plan of action. that happens in just about 3 1/2 hours from now eastern time. one of the many voices urging caution today on syria is syndicated columnist david sirota. he joins us live. nice to see you as always. we're going to get to your reservations about this here in just a minute. i just want to show a series of famous or maybe we should say infamous photographs. let me begin here. this is the u.n. security council. this was february 3rd, 2003. here he was. secretary of state collin powell. presenting what he said was evidence of iraqi weapons of mass destruction including nerve agents and poison gas. as we all now know, those american claims proved false. i'm just wondering to you,

david, does that history from ten years ago, does that handicap president obama? does it raise the bar for him in terms of convincing the world that syria has, in fact, used these tchemical weapons? >> absolutely. i think it does raise the bar. and i think president obama in a recent interview actually acknowledged that, saying that essentially to the american public that this is not going to become, at least from his perspective, another iraq. now, whether you trust him or not, when it comes to military intervention, it's clear that the white house has iraq and really america's collective memory of iraq on its mind. i think that's okay. i think the bar being set high to prove to the world that military intervention is legitimate, that should be the expectation here. whether we went through iraq or not. we have a right to know what u.s. national interests are at stake and whether military intervention really will create positive outcomes in terms of the humanitarian crisis in

syria. because there is a humanitarian crisis there. >> it is. when it comes to iraq, certainly in the collective memory. then you have congress, as we mentioned, that congreference c happening 6:00 p.m. eastern time. both parties demanding the president bring them in on this. perhaps seeking congressional approval. i just want to play some quick sound. this is a dissenting is voice on that. no less a republican here. take a listen. >> let me make it clear, i believe the president can take this action without authorization from the congress. i believe as commander in chief he has the right to take this action. it's in his interest to consult with the leadership in the house and senate. but i don't believe he has to. >> how important do you think it is, david sirota, that the president get that mark of approval, get that congressional authorization before striking? >> it's absolutely 100% critical. and barack obama of 2008 understood that it was critical when he gave an interview to the boston globe in which he said that as president, he does not have the authority, he would not

have the right under the u.s. constitution to bomb a country when that country doesn't pose an imminent threat to the united states. congressional approval is really essentially the approval of the american public. that's why the precepts in the constitution mandate that congress has a say over this. congress gets to declare war. that's effectively garnering consent of the public. if the president goes forward without that consent of the public -- >> which we know he can do. >> he can. he can. but there are constitutional questions. and there are certainly questions about why did he get elected in 2008 saying that he couldn't. and then turn around and if he does this, then essentially ignore his own words. >> it's a point to be made. david sirota, thank you very much, david. coming up, in most states it's illegal to text while you're behind the wheel. but one state is hoping to make it illegal to even send a text message to someone else who's

behind the wheel. that's right. you could be punished for sending a text to someone who is driving. we're going to break down that story, legally speaking, coming up next.

so we all know you're not supposed to be doing this, right, when you're driving your car. but did you know you could get in trouble if you are doing that

to someone who is behind the wheel? this could happen. we're talking about new jersey. if the driver crashes. here's the back story. a couple there got hit by a car and sued the driver and his girlfriend who was texting with him. an appeals court ruled if a texter knows somebody is driving, that texter can be held liable. the girl in this case was let off the hook because she said she had no idea her boyfriend was driving at the time. but this whole idea of punishing texters got huge reactions in new jersey. >> it's completely absurd. just because i know you're driving doesn't mean, you know, it really doesn't mean they know you're looking at it. so they can just be texting you something they're expecting you to read in the future. >> i wouldn't text anyone. i don't answer my phone when i'm driving. i don't think they should either. your life and other people's lives are important. >> okay. let me bring in our legal panel. this is something that got us fired up this morning. criminal defense attorney faith

jenkins and danny savalas joining us. faith, how could you actually prove, let's say you're driving. i'm texting you. how can i prove or know you're driving in the first place? >> i think in order for you to say someone is liable under this law you'd need an admission from the person saying, i knew they were driving. i knew they could possibly be distracted. and i sent them a text message anyway. that's what has to happen here. you have to have actual knowledge the person will read the text message while they're driving. then it has to be reasonable, foreseeable that they could be distracted and possibly get in an accident. the key here, it is still prudent, it is up to the driver to make prudent decisions about what to do when they receive a text message. the teenager in this case wasn't held liable because the judge said she had no way of knowing if this guy didn't pull over to the side of the road to read a text message or decide to read it later. >> danny, let me come to you in a second. let me make sure we get in chris christie. he's commenting on this. governor of new jersey. he said drivers are responsible. he told a radio station, quote, you have the obligation to keep

your eyes on the road, your hands on the wheel and pay attention to what you are doing. what to you think? is it effective at all in punishing the texter, not just the driver? >> here's what you need to know. the court here didn't say that as a matter of law, all people who text drivers are somehow responsible. it actually says quite the contrary. it took a specific set of facts and said, if you have knowledge that someone is driving, you may be held liable. but consider that that same court decided to hold not liable a teenager who was texting her boyfriend up to 100 times a day. the requirement is that they have that specific knowledge that they are somehow interfering with the person driving. that's a high standard. just because it's possible does not follow that it is now probable that it will happen. remember, this is a civil case. this is not a criminal matter. this is not a law enacted by legislature. this is a court's opinion that in theory it is possible to hold someone liable if they have that knowledge. it is a novel legal theory of

liability. >> it's novel, but at the same time, it definitely got me thinking this morning. it would be so great to have some kind of knowledge if i were texting someone and i don't know, if their name popped audiotaup a certain color in my phone, i would know they were driving and i shouldn't be texting them. things to think about. coming up next, this incredible story of survival. 6-year-old boy trapped under 11 feet of sand for nearly three hours. you see him. he was pulled out alive. his parents are calling it a miracle. what does little nathan here have to say about this? that's next. medicare? that's a good thing, but it doesn't cover everything. only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they help save you up to thousands in out-of-pocket costs. call today to request a free decision guide.

with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company, which has over 30 years of experience behind it. with all the good years ahead, look for the experience and commitment to go the distance with you. call now to request your free decision guide. see, i knew testosterone could affect sex drive, but not energy or even my mood. that's when i talked with my doctor. he gave me some blood tests... showed it was low t. that's it. it was a number. [ male announcer ] today, men with low t have androgel 1.62% testosterone gel. the #1 prescribed topical testosterone replacement therapy increases testosterone when used daily. women and children should avoid contact with application sites.

discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or signs in a woman, which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are or may become pregnant or are breast-feeding, should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. in a clinical study, over 80% of treated men had their t levels restored to normal. talk to your doctor about all your symptoms. get the blood tests. change your number. turn it up. androgel 1.62%.

6-year-old nathan woessner may have one of the most miraculous survival stories you have ever heard. what happened to him is he got trapped underneath 11 feet of sand for hours when he was visiting an indiana sand dune. and he is clearly alive today because of a couple of men and women who did not give up digging for him. now he and his parents are finally meeting them to say thank you. george howell has the emotional reunion. >> you like all them people clapping for you? that was pretty cool. >> reporter: when you consider exactly what nathan woessner went through, you understand why this moment was so important. >> this was everyone's miracle. >> reporter: finally meeting face to face the men and women who searched tirelessly and saved him, trapped beneath 11 feet of sand. >> we will always be so grateful

for what you did. and you will always be our heroes. >> reporter: his mother calls it simply a miracle. >> i believe that god did hold him. i believe he was right here, you know, in god's hands. and that god's hands held him and gave him air and comforted him and ultimately kept him safe until they found him. >> reporter: the dramatic rescue played out july 12th at the indiana dunes national lake shore. >> 911. >> there's a kid that fell in a hole on mt. baldy. >> we have everybody on the way. >> reporter: nathan stepped on to a sink hole at the top of a sand dune known as mt. baldy. officer greg radiger was first to arrive. >> it was hard to dig in the sand.

it was collapsing on top of us. it was one step forward and ten steps back with the sand. >> reporter: about three hours later they finally found him. there was one point where people thought he was dead. >> i was one of them. when we pulled young nathan out of the hole, it was only a body. an hour later my friend called me, he goes, greg, he's alive. he's in the hospital. he's alive. i had no idea. it was amazing. it's a blessing from god. >> reporter: it's a lot to take in for this sometimes shy 6-year-old. >> you like being a superstar? yeah? why? >> because i get presents. >> reporter: even his parents have trouble finding the right words. >> i don't know that we could ever express what, you know, feelings or emotions or the love we have for everyone that was there, had a role to play in this. because, you know, thank you just doesn't seem like enough. >> reporter: george howell, cnn, michigan city, indiana.

coming up, what do president obama, miley cyrus and alex baldwin have in common? we'll tell you, next. okay, listen up! i'm re-workin' the menu. mayo? corn dogs? you are so outta here! aah! [ female announcer ] the complete balanced nutrition of great-tasting ensure. 24 vitamins and minerals, antioxidants, and 9 grams of protein. [ bottle ] ensure®. nutrition in charge™. [ beeping ] ♪ [ male announcer ] we don't just certify our pre-owned vehicles. we inspect, analyze and recondition each one, until it's nothing short of a genuine certified pre-owned... mercedes-benz for the next new owner.

♪ hurry in to your authorized mercedes-benz dealer for 1.99% financing during our certified pre-owned sales event through september 3rd. it's lots of things. all waking up. connecting to the global phenomenon we call the internet of everything. ♪ it's going to be amazing. and exciting. and maybe, most remarkably, not that far away. we're going to wake the world up. and watch, with eyes wide, as it gets to work. cisco. tomorrow starts here.

right now in washington president obama is getting ready to brief congress on his plans for possible action against syria as this debate heats up. are the questions of iraq fair? we'll discuss that coming up

next. speaking of the president, he is in one of the top five videos of the day on cnn.com. roll it. you are clicking on the president's interview with pbs in which he makes an admission. >> first of all, i have not made a decision. i have gotten options from our military. >> number four, red worms found in the tap water. this is in a town in oklahoma. ugh. that can be an inch long. one expert says it's not uncommon, actually, in the southeast. number three. ♪ if attention is what miley cyrus wanted, well, she's the big winner online. her twerking showcased on mtv still getting clicks four days later. the top two videos on cnn, they involve a celebrity scuffle and a dance move. those after the break. ♪ turn around

♪ every now and then i get a little bit hungry ♪ ♪ and there's nothing good around ♪ ♪ turn around barry ♪ i finally found the right snack ♪ ♪

and we're back. here are cnn.com's top two videos of the day. number two, a celebrity scuffle. and the celeb actually has the same last name as mine. new daddy alec baldwin not a fan of the paparazzi. new photos appear to show baldwin tangling with a photographer on the streets of new york city. both baldwin and the photographer called 911. neither wants to press charges. now the number one cnn.com video. actually from our own jeanne

moos. >> twerking merits a scientific explanation. pregnant twerking. grandmas twerking. leno is broadcasting fake sightings of miley twerking. >> moos even dug out a months old clip from our own christine romans trying to figure out how to twerk. >> twerking, you ask? i have no idea. that's twerking. my grandmother watches this show. can we just take that down? >> reporter: here's a phrase we haven't heard miley cyrus utter. >> twerking. make it go away! let's move on. today's human factor. it's about a young man who didn't let hearing loss interfere with his love of music. here is dr. sanjay gupta. >> reporter: deejay robby wild. he lives in a world of rhythm and base. he just can't hear it.

severe ear infections as a child left wild completely deaf in his right air and 80% deaf in his left. >> my mom was crying when the doctors said it. me being the one with the hearing loss, you know, i went up to my mom. i'm like, mom, it's okay. i'm going to be all right. i promise you. you'll see. i'll be fine. >> reporter: although hearing is the most important sense in a deejay's life, wilde was still determined to make it. he went to deejay school to learn the art of turntablism. and he relies on a computer to see the music. red is a kick from the bass. blue, that's a snare. greens are vocal. >> i don't want you to see me as a deaf deejay or deaf kid trying to deejay. i want you to see me as a great deejay that happens to be deaf. i don't want sympathy. i don't want let's give him a gig because he's hearing

impaired. >> wilde's skims got him noticed by hp. >> it doesn't matter that i can't hear the music. >> reporter: besides, wilde says, some things are just better left unheard. >> you know, there's a lot of sounds out in the world you don't want to hear. i like it muffled. i like who i am. i'm proud of who i am. >> reporter: dr. sanjay gupta. syria vows to defend itself should the u.s. attack. and as tensions rise, some experts say taking action could be a huge mistake. you'll hear why. i'm brooke baldwin. the news is now. the five reasons the u.s. always feels compelled to intervene in the middle east. and the victim in this horrific bus beating gets an apology from one of the suspects' dads. >> my heart for my son. i know i didn't raise him like

that. plus, fast food workers across america demanding 15 bucks an hour. question is, will they get it? and live during this hour, protests over a judge's decision to sentence a rapist to just 30 to sentence a rapist to just 30 days behind bars. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com here we go. hour two. great to be with you. i'm brooke baldwin. behind closed doors, a meeting of the u.n. security council now under way. diplomats from the world's most powerful countries. britain, china, france, russia, and the u.s. they're sitting around. they're debating what to do about syria. a response to the accusations president bashar al assad used nerve gas on his own people. children. u.s. intel says there is no doubt he did it, and they have a report to prove it. >> we have discussed our

commitment to producing for you and for the american public to review an unclassified version of an intelligence assessment about the assad regime's use of chemical weapons in syria. it's my understanding that that -- that that report has not been finalized as of this moment. but that we are still on track to produce that report before the end of the week. >> so not today? >> i'm not ruling out today. >> we could tell you in just a couple hours from now the white house officials will be briefing members of congress at 6:00 eastern time. teleconference. we hear the line is not secure, it will not be classified information. already dozens of members have signed this letter to the president saying, let me quote, while the ongoing human rights violations and continued loss of life are horrific, they should not draw us into an unwise war. before weighing the use of military force, congress must fully debate and consider the

facts and every alternative. the woman who wrote that letter is congress nan barbara lee, california democrat who actually famously became the one no vote against the war in afghanistan. congresswoman lee joins me live from california. nice to see you, congresswoman. welcome to the show. i know in a couple hours the president will be briefing you tonight. what would you like to hear from president obama? >> well, let me first say thank you very much for the opportunity to be with you to discuss this. what we need to do, not only hearing from the president, but conducting a debate on the floor of congress as it relates to the use of military force. as you said, the violations of human rights, the use of chemical weapons, we need to condemn this unequivocally. there is no place for this type of action against humanity. these are crimes against humanity. we cannot, however, be drawn

into a regional conflict, which could happen, and more lives could be taken. you know, so before any military action is conducted by the united states, we need to have a full congressional debate. the people in our country deserve to hear the facts. they deserve to know how their tax dollars are going to be used. they deserve to know what the fallout, the implications, the ramifications are of such strikes. and, in fact, i believe that we need to provide those alternatives. there's got to be a negotiated settlement. because there's no military solution. and i think history shows us that. and so we need to be very careful in how we exercise the use of military force. >> on this subject of this debate that you would like to have happen in congress, you were actually on the side with a number of republicans. in fact, specifically senator rand paul saying yesterday, u.s., quote, has no clear national security connection to the war in syria. also calling for debate. but the question is, and you talk about alternatives, negotiating. what is the biggest risk in your opinion if the u.s. does not

act? >> let me say that the u.s. must act. but it does not -- >> militarily. >> -- necessarily mean act in a military capacity. we have to engage in a regional diplomatic effort. we need to make sure that we put all of the regional players in place to seek a negotiated settlement. the inspectors are still there. you know, when the iraq war occurred, i offered a resolution that said, minimally, let's let the inspections process move forward before any action is considered. well, i got 72 vote on that amendment. so we need to come up with a strategy that makes sense, that does not create any more carnage, any more violence. and really try to move towards seeking a negotiated solution. >> according to reports, the u.n. weapons inspectors will be out of country on saturday. i just hear this word "negotiation." we've seen, we've seen bodty after body. we've seen the carnage, as you describe it, in damascus from

this most recent attack. i just have to ask, do you think president al assad will negotiate? >> let me say, first of all, i think that we need to make sure we continue to engage with the united nations. we need to make sure that the world community is with us in whatever actions that we take. and we need to isolate the assad regime. we're smart enough and we know what to do and how to do this. but i really believe that military strikes, and i think the majority of the american people understand, that a three-day or a two-day surgical strike may or may not work. but the potential of an outbreak of another war is very, very great. so we need to do whatever it takes to mitigate against this and to save lives and to move towards some semblance of stability in the region. that does not allow for the use of military force, i do not believe. but, minimally, the congress should come back in session. we should debate this. we should look at the facts. and our commander in chief, of

course the president has a grave responsibility to act in the united states' national security interest. but congress also has its constitutional responsibility and authority to debate matters when it comes to war and peace, and we should do that and we should do that immediately. >> okay. congresswoman lee, we appreciate you. we appreciate you sharing your perspective. i know many of your colleagues share the same. thank you. and i want to talk syria. i want to continue talking syria here. gloria borger is our chief political analyst. jane newton small, washington correspondent, "time" magazine. "time's" cover portrays the president as, quote, the unhappy warrior. welcome to both of you. gloria, let me just begin with you. the these calls -- you were just hearing my conversation with the congresswoman. the calls for congressional approval. is this any different from politics, turf battles? pretty much any time the president is considering use of force overseas? >> well, it's a constitutional issue. i think it's a constitutional issue that where you stand

depends on where you sit. and as you know very well, you've been talking about this for days, brooke, that when barack obama was a senator, he believed that george w. bush needed to go back to congress for reauthorization of the war in iraq. but as president of the united states, he intervened in libya. he had a surge in afghanistan. and he didn't go to congress for permission on either of those. so i think it's a real interpretation of how -- of how you interpret presidential power and whether he has the constitutional authority to do this on his own. but if history is any guide, i would have to say that president after president does act without congressional authorization. i mean, the last time we really did this was in 2002. and so i think that this president's going to say he's on -- he's on firm ground. what he needs to get is public

opinion. >> which seems to have evolved since our polling early in may. numbers are dwindling when it comes to support. jay, gloria mentioned iraq. we heard the president make a big distinction on this. he said it would not be like iraq. take a listen. >> if, in fact, we can take limited, tailored approaches, not getting drawn into a long conflict, not a repetition of, you know, iraq, which i know a lot of people are worried about. >> jay, you wrote an entire piece. "time" magazine. give me a couple examples. >> first of all, when president george w. bush finally made his case to go to war to the american people in 2003 in iraq, he already had 130,000 u.s. troops mustered along iraq's border. we're not talking about boots on the ground. we're not talking about putting american lives at risk. we're talking about a short

term, two or three day limiteden gaugeme gaugement where we're going to punish bashar al assad for using chemical weapons against his people. show him when you cross red lines there is punishment. there's consequences. yes. america will not stand by and allow that to happen. >> go ahead. give me another example. >> the other example is essentially that there are actually chemical weapons here this time. we've seen ample evidence of that being used. we've seen hundreds of dead bodies. apparently almost 1,300 are dead in syria. in this case. last time around there was this whole sort of dog and pony show about the weapons of mass destruction in iraq and how it was very serious. it ended up being nothing in iraq. so i think that really is almost a problem for obama because there's a hangover now that has happened where people are very leery of going into any kind of engagement in the middle east because last time around, the evidence, the intelligence, was fabricated. >> the collective consciousness. the collective memory, right? >> the american public doesn't

really believe that there's anything called a limited engagement anymore. there is this worry. if you put the issue of the chemical weapons aside, there really is this worry that no matter what you do, the law of unintended consequences will take over. and that if you -- no matter what your intentions are for a surgical strike, lobbing a few cruise missiles, whatever, that in the end, there can be a reaction. whether assad responds, whether iran responds, whether israel gets attacked. there's all these kind of things that could evolve as a result of this. so the american public is like, wait a minute. we think this is bad. but could this end up being worse? >> and thus the quagmire and thus the reason why we continue to debate and we wait and we decide and we see what happens when it comes to a possible strike. jay newton small, "time" magazine. gloria borger, thank you ladies both very much. coming up next, the fallout from a controversial sentence for a former high school teacher who admitted raping a

14-year-old student. a protest against the judge here in this case who said that this teen rape victim was as much in control as the teacher. then sentenced him to 31 days. we'll have that for you from montana. plus, a landmark decision today for the nfl. 4,500 players accusing the league of hiding information about concussions. today this historic settlement worth hundreds of millions of dollars. that's coming up. the humble back seat. we believe it can be the most valuable real estate on earth. ♪ that's why we designed the subaru forester from the back seat forward. the intelligently designed, responsibly built, completely restyled subaru forester. love. it's what makes a subaru, a subaru.

here it is. huge protests right now. this is outside the courthouse. this is billings, montana. hundreds of people are calls for this one particular judge to quit. here he is. this is the judge. g. todd baugh. on monday he sentenced a 49-year-old man, former teacher, no less, for raping a 14-year-old girl. that girl ended up killing herself. the teacher who raped her, this man, got 30 days in jail. outrageous? yeah. most people think so. but they are just as upset about what the judge said as he handed down the sentence. he basically blamed the victim. judge g. todd baugh said this

girl, remember, she was 14, quote, seemed older than her chronological age and was, quote, as much in control of the situation as the teacher. here is the judge now apologizing. >> in the sentencing, i made some references to the victim's age and control. i'm not sure just what i was attempting to say at that point. but it didn't come out correct. what i said was demeaning to all women. not what i believe in. and irrelevant to the sentencing. i owe all our fellow citizens an apology. >> so he apologized for his words. but he did not apologize for that short jail sentence. here's the girl's mother. she was on cnn's "new day" this morning. >> chronological age? who is he to decide what her chronological -- you know, that she's older than her

chronological age? she was 14. chronologically. and that's what is relevant. how could she be in control of this situation? he was a teacher. she was a student. she wasn't in control of anything. she was 14. >> i want to take you now straight to billings, montana, to our affiliate reporter there, drew trapton with ptvq. drew, set the scene for me. tell me what these protesters, what are they telling you? >> reporter: all right, brooke. yeah, we had about 500 people show up on our courthouse lawn today. in billings, montana, that's a big deal. usually we see about 50 to 100 people come out for one of those things. you know, people had signs. they were signing a petition and event organizers said that they actually had 30,000 signatures on the petition they have going online, which is at moveon.org. a few of the people i spoke with came out because they themselves

were rape victims. and it was the first time that they were ever talking about their experience being sexually assaulted. and they thought this was the opportune moment to come out and to share their story to support the victim and to seek what they perceive is justice in this sentence. >> so what specifically justicewise are they asking for? >> reporter: well, they're asking for three things, brooke. first they're asking for his resignation. they said this cannot stand. the event organizers got up and they spoke briefly and said this is the sort of thing that just cannot stand. in billings, montana. it cannot stand anywhere in the nation. second of all, they want this sentence to be appealed to the montana supreme court. and they want to see some judicial action come from somewhere to right this perceived wrong. thirdly, they would like a judicial review committee which comes from the montana supreme court to look at judge baugh's case load in the past and to see if there are any perceived

injustices from the past as well. >> we'll follow it to see if they get any of that. true trafton, thank you very much for us in billings. more now on one of our breaking stories this afternoon. huge, huge doings when it comes to the national football league. former nfl players, they have now officially agreed to settle this lawsuit over on field concussions. you have more than 4,500 ex-player. they are the ones who accused the league of decades upon decades of deception, hiding the fact the players risked permanent brain damage if they returned to football too son soon after concussion. attorney and former prosecutor faith jenkins and cnn legal analyst danny cevallos joining me once again here to talk about the settlement. $75 million for medical exams. $675 million in compensation for concussion injuries. $10 million medical and safety research. legal fees. other expenses related to the lawsuit. right? when you look at all of that,

does that sound fair to you, danny? >> well, it's hard to understand fairness when we talk about something like in this multidistrict litigation where you have so many plaintiffs. but keep in mind that each of those are going to need significant medical treatment in varying amounts. when you also consider the potential risk the nfl had of going to trial on each of these individually complex claims, the potential exposure here was in the billions, i think. that's a conservative estimate. it's always hard to wrap your mind around these multiple, multiple plaintiff lawsuits. because each individual plaintiffs, when you're looking at the sum, it looks like there's many, many millions of dollars. but we're talking about actual medical damages that have to be covered by this settlement. so i think in any settlement, each sidewalks away giving something up. this is not the total exposure the nfl was exposed to, but it represents a detente. it represents a compromise. >> i was talking to jamal

anderson, former atlanta falcon. he was involved in this particular suit. he said, lincolsten, bronkoke, not about the money. it's about raising the issue in the most popular sport in the country. the fact of the matter is, the nfl, they do not have to now reveal important medical concussion, brain damage information. correct? >> this settlement is a win for the nfl for two reasons, mainly. one, no admission of liability whatsoever. these players accused the nfl of knowingly hiding the long-term effects of concussions and encouraging them to go back into the game to protect the image of the game. and also look at the in your opinions. $765 million. the nfl had over $9 billion in revenue last year alone. so this is a win for them. going forward, yes, players who are now retired will be able to tap into a compensation fund that they set up. but in the end, this is a win. they want to get this settled before the season starts. because they don't want these players continuously talking in

the media, bad press. one even died last year while trying to get money from the nfl to pay for his medical expenses. >> this is done. raising awareness and hopefully present players are protected. faith jenkins, danny cevallos, thank you two, very much. in a show of strength in 50 cities across the country, fast food workers walking off the job, demanding higher pay. coming up next, we are live at one of the biggest rallies in the country. [ male announcer ] don't miss red lobster's endless shrimp. it's as much as you like, any way you like. try classic garlic shrimp scampi and more. only $15.99, offer ends soon. so come in and sea food differently. now, try seven lunch choices for $7.99. sandwiches, salads and more.

fast food chains, probably not loving it today. [ chanting ] >> workers in 60 cities striking today against the places you know. mcdonald's, burger king, kfc

among them. some are protesting inside businesses like this mickey d's in st. louis. all eyes are on syria. the international community watches to see how the united states and other countries will respond to the use of chemical weapons there. next, we're giving you five specific reasons why the u.s. may feel obligated to take action.

bottom of the hour. i'm brooke baldwin. and debates all around the world and right here in the united states as countries weigh the options when it comes to syria. and how to respond to the belief that bashar al assad used toxic nerve gas on his own people. women. you see them here. children. a u.s. intel report says it is sure of it, but the u.n. has not even wrapped up its tests yet. we see these inspectors here wearing their gas masks. they are still inside syria. they're collecting blood samples. they're interviewing survivors. while many countries, britain among them, say they are waiting on a report from these inspectors, the u.s. says it has its own timeline. but questions still remain. what is the timeline? what does the military plan look like? for many, why get involved at all? tom foreman joins me now from washington. i know, tom, there are several reasons why the u.s. government may feel obligated to get involved here in syria.

walk me through your top five pressure points. >> yeah. there are plenty of reasons not to get involved as well. but if you're looking for those that they have to consider right now, one is simply the notion that this is about the middle east and our own ally, israel, over here. the notion that this is already spreading beyond the limits of that country. they have had refugees flooding by the millions into other places. it threatens the stability of an area that the whole world relies on for energy and, of course, we do have an old ally there in israel that we would not want it to be hurt if it got out of control. china and russia are also one of the reasons the u.s. might feel obligated to be involved here. simply because china and russia in their own way are also involved. and there's much of the sense among some diplomatic circles that you can't let them take the field and say we'll dictate terms. the u.s. has to say we have standards as well. here's one that's really tricky. syrian stability. in a simple sense, right now the

government tdoes not want the assad regime to fall at this point. the u.s. government doesn't. because there's so many actors out here, so many groups, like hezbollah and al qaeda, that they don't want to take over if the government collapses there. in a strange way, it could be argued by some that this would be a punitive measure to save the assad regime, keep it under control, don't do wild things even as you're struggling for your survival. because that could create chaos that could be bad for everybody. there's also a question of iran. the u.s. has been at odds were quite some time with iran over this idea of developing nuclear weapons. iran says it's not. it's all about energy. nonetheless, this has gone on and on and on. iran is a big supporter, a big sponsor of syria. so by stepping on syria over this chemical weapons attack, by saying we will not tolerate that, that's a way of sending a very strong message to iran that the united states will not

tolerate further nuclear developments as well. and maybe one of the biggest reasons out there has to do with this idea of credibility. the president of the united states made it clear that he did not want to tolerate an attack like this in violation of international norms. if he now backs away from that statement, if it appears that he's unwilling to follow up on what was in a sense a threat, there are many countries in the world that would see that as weakness. whether that's fair or not or political or not, let's push that all aside. we'll just say that's the reality of how it might be perceived. is that a justification for an attack like this? well, that's for the diplomats and politicians to sort out. nonetheless, it's one of the reasons being cited. you have to be very careful about making very, very big threats if you're not going to follow through. brooke? >> so those are a couple of reasons why the u.s. may feel obligated to intervene. tom foreman, thank you. i want to show our viewers pictures from damascus today. here he is, right side of your screen. the leader here, syrian leader

bashar al assad appearing on state-run television. smiling. gesturing. directing this meeting here. and he vowed that syria will defend itself against any and all aggression. with me now, hala gorani, cnn international. you know this part of the world better than most people here at cnn. let me just come out and ask you this. from the perspective of the arab world, could they perceive bashar al assad as the guy who stood up to president obama? >> you know, i think it depends basically what side of this conflict you're on. the sides are too entrenched. it's become so polarized and so much of a proxy war inside syria, no matter what the u.s. does at this point it will either reinforce your point of view that they are fighting for rebels aligned with al qaeda or reinforce your point of view they are aligning themselves regionally with the allies they have in the middle east already. i don't think that's going to turn him into some sort of hero among people who already dislike

him intensely. and that's putting it mildly. i think that people, even those opposed to the regime, are a little bit uneasy about this potential strike. they think what is it going to achieve? is it all about safeguarding america's credibility after having uttered those famous words, the red line in the sand, et cetera. or is this truly strategic. i think people, including in the west, and we heard in the parliamentary debate in london today, brooke. >> right. >> you heard very fiery, you have to admit that nobody does a parliamentary debate like the british, right? well, you heard opponents of david cameron, ed miliband, for instance. >> live pictures. it continues. >> it's continuing. absolutely. it's actually great viewing. saying you cannot go and watlau a military strike based on the high likelihood that the regime is responsible for a chemical attack. at the very least you need to wait for results to come in. >> i want to read you something that john mccain said. this was yesterday. those who say we should stay out

of syria do not understand that this is now a regional conflict. in other words, this is not merely contained now to syria. is he right? >> he's absolutely right. this is not just a syrian conflict. this is a conflict that involves practically all of its neighbors. every single arab country with the exception of only a few has taken a stand for or against the regime. and it's not just arab countries. it's iran aligned with assad. turkey aligned with the rebels. the u.s. aligned perhaps with the forces against assad. and it's russia aligned with the regime. so you see this has become inside of syria very much a proxy war. never forgetting that those who are suffering most are the civilians. i keep repeating, we keep using the 100,000 dead figure. but it's a country of 22 million people. imagine that on the scale of the united states. more than 1 million dead in 2 1/2 year. that's the tragedy of what's going on in that country. and it will engulf the rest of

the region at some point. as it already has in countries like lebanon, for instance. >> hala gorani, thank you very much. we appreciate it. coming up, moments ago, the teens accused of savagely beating a classmate on a bus. remember this? they have now appeared in court. but one of the suspects' dads has a message for the victim. we're live outside that courthouse for you, next.

just a short time ago in a florida juvenile court, three teenage boys plead eed guilty t charges involving the beating of a younger boy on a school bus. the incident last month was caught on surveillance cam. prosecutors said the older teens were seeking revenge after the boy told teachers that they tried to sell him drugs. the bus driver was too afraid to break up the fight. but he did call for help. he also retired after this whole thing happened. i want to bring in pamela brown, who is there for us in florida. pamela, just tell me what

happened in the court. i mean, i understand that one of the suspects' dads had a message for the victim? >> reporter: yes, actually, all the parents spoke here today, brooke. they all said that they were sorry. that their hearts go out to this young victim, only 13 years old. in fact, one of the mothers of the victim started crying as she was apologizing, saying she never expected this kind of behavior from her son. so it was very emotional. of course, when the video was shown of that brutal beating, and the 30-plus seconds of the actual attack, you couldn't hear a pin drop in that courtroom. it was especially impactful because this is the first time many of us have seen the video without the faces blurred. so we watched about -- we watched several minutes of the video. and we saw what led up to the actual attack. we saw the taunting go on between these three teens and the 13-year-old victim. and we saw as they prepared to attack the victim.

as the judge said, it was like a volcano about to erupt that then erupted. in fact, brooke, after the video was shown, after we saw that brutal attack, the prosecutor got choked up. he could not even talk, he was so emotional. the judge calling it absolutely disgusting. let's take a listen to what happened in that moment. >> as, again, i stated earlier, the actual attack, if you count the seconds off, is 33 seconds, judge. of a completely defenseless young man who did nothing but what he was asked to do. excuse me. as far as sentencing goes, judge, the state is not standing here asking for a commitment at this point. but if any case should be considered for commitment, it would be this one. excuse me. >> reporter: so you see there, brooke, very emotional. you have to think how many times this prosecutor has seen that video. and yet it still touches him in

that way. for the judge, he said it was the first time he saw the video. like i said, he said it was just a disgusting display. shocking. and just horrible. >> not often you see a prosecutor like that getting emotional in the courtroom. as you mentioned, pamela, these boys accepted the guilty pleas. what were the specific charges? >> reporter: well, all three of them will face aggravated -- or, you know, pleaded guilty to aggravated battery charges. and there is -- one of the defendants is facing an additional robbery charge for stealing $5 from that 13-year-old victim. his punishment is a little more severe. he has to do a little bit more community service as a result. but they've all been placed on a supervised probation by the department of juvenile justice. so they have to go through anger management counseling. they have to be -- they have to have ankle monitors for, i think, up to 60 days. after that there's a strict curfew in place. some people are saying, you know, that this punishment isn't

severe enough. but as we heard the state say today and the department of juvenile justice, they're trying to rehabilitate these three teens. and they worry that if it is more severe, that it could actually -- the outcome could be worse. they are first time offenders. so that is a big reason why they were placed on probation. >> pamela brown, thank you very much in clearwater, florida. coming up next, a huge decision by the federal government on marijuana. will the department of justice try to block states from legalizing its recreational use? that's next. [ tires screech ] [ beeping ] ♪ [ male announcer ] we don't just certify our pre-owned vehicles. we inspect, analyze and recondition each one, until it's nothing short of a genuine certified pre-owned... mercedes-benz for the next new owner. ♪ hurry in to your authorized mercedes-benz dealer for 1.99% financing during our certified pre-owned sales event

through september 3rd.

big news from the justice department today, because it is changing its tune when it comes to marijuana enforcement. so for now, you know the deal. the feds coming out saying they will not overturn these new recreational marijuana laws that came into effect both in colorado and in washington state. remember? voters went to the polls ten months ago and approved the legalization of recreational

marijuana use. john berman is in once again for jake tapper on "the lead" today. mr. berman, nice to see you and talk to you. >> great to see you, brooke. they're popping bags of doritos in washington and colorado. it's been a gray area since last november. now the department of justice has weighed in, saying we're not going to block those laws. they issued these guidelines suggesting what they want the feds to do is focus on things like teen drug use or driving under the influence. that's where they want the enforcement to be. not blocking the laws for recreational use in those states like washington and colorado. >> it's interesting, though, hearing apparently dea agents are saying this is actually going to make their job tougher. i know you're going into this on the show today. we'll be watching you at the top of the hour. go ahead. >> there are a lot of issues with that. just one of the things we'll be talking about along with all the developments in syria and the big news with the nfl and

concussions as well, brooke. >> john berman, we will be tuned in. we will see you in 15 minutes here hosting "the lead." thank you very much. meantime, are you having a tough time sleeping? you're not alone. a new government study reveals surprising new information when it comes to americans and their sleep solutions. that is next. plus, these videos, i can't get enough of them. of a reunion that will give you chills. ♪

first up, possible deal sets up conflict between protesters in argentina. about 5,000 demonstrators took to the streets in a proposed agreement with chevron. officers used tear gas and rubber bullets when they started to tear down barricades around the legislature. >> and a new study says americans are popping sleeping pills at an alarming rate.

at least 8.6 million americans take prescription sleep aids like ambien or lunesta. approximately 50 million suffer from disrupted sleep. and now to a moment we never get sick of seeing. >> oh, my goodness. i should have told you to grab the kleenex before we rolled this. how awesome is this? military dad, coming home,

seeing her daughter for the first time in months. she thought she was getting an award and her dad was able to return home after he was injured. we thank him of course and all those for their service. coming up, is your family prepared? this new ad campaign wants to get that conversation rolling taking a pretty unique approach. we'll talk to kelly wallace about that next. >> wait, what is it? >> it's difficult to talk about so i'm not telling you. >> how will we know what to do? >> we won't. >> i'm so glad i don't have to remember anything. >> me, too. [ beeping ] ♪ [ male announcer ] we don't just certify our pre-owned vehicles. we inspect, analyze and recondition each one, until it's nothing short of a genuine certified pre-owned... mercedes-benz for the next new owner. ♪ hurry in to your authorized mercedes-benz dealer for 1.99% financing during our certified pre-owned sales event through september 3rd.

yes for you. does your family have a disaster plan? most americans do not. there's a new ad encouraging you to come up with a disaster plan. here's part it have. >> i've come up with a family emergency plan. >> great. what is it? >> it's difficult to talk about it so i won't. >> how do we know what to do? >> we don't. >> the message is do not leave your family unprepared when it comes to a disaster. i'm talking hurricanes, hurricane katrina hit the gulf coast eight years ago today. so many examples.

let me talk to kelly wallace, talks all things kids, families. great to you have on. let's just begin with what really is the point of this ad? >> well, you know, you talk about the humor. part of it is taking a light hearted approach to get people to pay attention, brooke, because so many of us do not have disaster plans. the ad council did a survey. six out of ten americans say they don't have an emergency disaster plan. only about 20% said they were very prepared for disaster. the hope is using humor, we're talking about it, people are paying attention and they might see themselves in that family and say we might want to do something different than we saw the family do in that ad. >> when you say have a plan, be specific. >> there are three things, who to call, where to go, what to

pack. every family should have those three things answered. that ad showed you need to can't that to your children so they know who to call, what to do, what to pack in the event of a disaster or emergency. >> let me play one more clip. >> okay, who is going to do what? >> i'll pack the dead batteries. >> okay. >> i'll pack everything i don't need. >> and i'll try to get the generator going without any gas. >> so this is one other example. and i know that even you, kelly wallace, and your two little ones, i watched the whole piece on cnn.com and you're like let me be honest, i didn't have a plan. you, yourself, didn't have one. >> i know. i was embarrassed really to sort of say that. but we don't have a plan. i was talking to my mother-in-law as i was preparing to do the piece. she said we talk about

everything, right, but we've never really talked about what we need to do. why? i don't know. part it have is we think it's not going to happen to us. but, hello, we had sandy, katrina, the september 11th attacks. we clearly know it can happen and we need to do something about it. >> read kelly's piece, cnn.com/opinion. i just want to show you about this massive fire fighting effort continuing. it may take a few more weeks here. look at this. this is the wilderness side of the historic park. many of you have probably taken family vacations here, right? some 200,000 acres have already burned. but the site of the park, where most tourists venture, is still open. firefighters are trying to keep it that way. the fire is now reported at least 30% contained. and always a quick reminder, if you miss things and i'm tweeting

and people say i missed this, go to the brooke blog, go to cnn.com/brooke. i will be back at this time tomorrow. in the meantime, we go to washington. john berman is sitting in for jake tapper. "the lead" starts right now. the next few hours are crucial if the obama administration really plans to strike syria. i'm john berman and this is "the lead." the world lead. after complaining they're getting left in the dark, some lawmakers will soon hear what the administration has on syria. can the skeptics be won over? we'll talk to a lawmaker in the president's own party who is dead set against intervention. and would a strike on the syrian regime put us on the same side as al qaeda? would it trigger retaliation against u.s. ally israel? the